It is mentioned in a hadith in al-Bukhari: “There will certainly be among my Ummah people who will consider lawful the unlawful and silk.”
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The classification of permissibilization: permissibilization of the heart and permissibilization of the tongue, actual permissibilization. In the hadith of al-Bukhari, which he narrated in a suspended form to the end, is there evidence that actual permissibilization does not take its practitioner out of Islam, based on the indication that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ruled that they had made lawful some sins, and yet, in the same hadith, he also ruled that they were from his Ummah? Does this interpretation hold?
The Shaykh : I mean the classification of permissibilization.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Into two categories.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It is necessary, my brother. Is permissibilization closer to reporting that the one who makes it lawful is a disbeliever, or is the word “disbelief,” meaning which of the two terms, “the one who makes it lawful” or “the disbeliever,” is closer to expressing the apparent fact that he has committed disbelief and apostatized from his religion? The word “made lawful” or “disbelief”?
The questioner : Disbelief.
The Shaykh : Well, if it is disbelief before the division, then permissibilization is even more susceptible to division. In any case, may Allah reward you. This is said because of this question and similar ones, which I mentioned in connection with disbelief in my first answer regarding open sinfulness and oppression.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : All of this… must be divided into two categories: practical and of the heart.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This permissibilization as well; the one who makes a thing lawful is not only the one mentioned in the hadith. If he makes lawful in his heart any thing that he does, which Allah has forbidden, without committing it in his action, he is a disbeliever who has apostatized from his religion.
The questioner : Is it valid to use this hadith as evidence, O Shaykh, in this way?
The Shaykh : What is the hadith used as evidence for?
The questioner : For the issue of this hadith here.
The Shaykh : Peace and mercy of Allah be upon you.
The questioner : That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) established and affirmed permissibilization upon them, so here it is carried along with actual permissibilization, based on the indication that he made… the hadith said “from my Ummah.”
The Shaykh : This, may Allah reward you, can be said: is it used as evidence? But is it interpreted? Is permissibilization interpreted as possibly being practical permissibilization or not? As for saying whether it is used as evidence for this or for something else, we say it is not used as evidence. Not because the permissibilization here is intended to mean only practical permissibilization, from which the disbelief of apostasy does not follow, nor is it used as evidence for the opposite of that. Rather, it is said that what is intended by permissibilization here may be practical permissibilization, and it may be permissibilization of the heart. This and that can be interpreted. As for the hadith, it does not indicate [one specific meaning] because it is possible that what is intended by permissibilization is permissibilization of the heart, just as it is possible that what is intended by it is practical permissibilization. As for the word “my Ummah,” it sometimes includes the Ummah of the call and sometimes includes the Ummah of response. Therefore, the mention of the word “my Ummah” in the hadith does not serve as an indication to interpret permissibilization as practical permissibilization or as permissibilization of the heart. Rather, that depends on the case; some may do it this way and some may do it that way. Well, some make it lawful in both action and heart, and some make it lawful in the heart but not in action, and some, as we said, in both heart and action, meaning…
There will certainly be people from my Ummah who will consider lawful the unlawful and silk
لَيكونَنَّ أقوام من أمَّتي يستحلُّون الحِرَ والحريرThe Shaykh : I mean the classification of permissibilization.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Into two categories.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : It is necessary, my brother. Is permissibilization closer to reporting that the one who makes it lawful is a disbeliever, or is the word “disbelief,” meaning which of the two terms, “the one who makes it lawful” or “the disbeliever,” is closer to expressing the apparent fact that he has committed disbelief and apostatized from his religion? The word “made lawful” or “disbelief”?
The questioner : Disbelief.
The Shaykh : Well, if it is disbelief before the division, then permissibilization is even more susceptible to division. In any case, may Allah reward you. This is said because of this question and similar ones, which I mentioned in connection with disbelief in my first answer regarding open sinfulness and oppression.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : All of this… must be divided into two categories: practical and of the heart.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : This permissibilization as well; the one who makes a thing lawful is not only the one mentioned in the hadith. If he makes lawful in his heart any thing that he does, which Allah has forbidden, without committing it in his action, he is a disbeliever who has apostatized from his religion.
The questioner : Is it valid to use this hadith as evidence, O Shaykh, in this way?
The Shaykh : What is the hadith used as evidence for?
The questioner : For the issue of this hadith here.
The Shaykh : Peace and mercy of Allah be upon you.
The questioner : That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) established and affirmed permissibilization upon them, so here it is carried along with actual permissibilization, based on the indication that he made… the hadith said “from my Ummah.”
The Shaykh : This, may Allah reward you, can be said: is it used as evidence? But is it interpreted? Is permissibilization interpreted as possibly being practical permissibilization or not? As for saying whether it is used as evidence for this or for something else, we say it is not used as evidence. Not because the permissibilization here is intended to mean only practical permissibilization, from which the disbelief of apostasy does not follow, nor is it used as evidence for the opposite of that. Rather, it is said that what is intended by permissibilization here may be practical permissibilization, and it may be permissibilization of the heart. This and that can be interpreted. As for the hadith, it does not indicate [one specific meaning] because it is possible that what is intended by permissibilization is permissibilization of the heart, just as it is possible that what is intended by it is practical permissibilization. As for the word “my Ummah,” it sometimes includes the Ummah of the call and sometimes includes the Ummah of response. Therefore, the mention of the word “my Ummah” in the hadith does not serve as an indication to interpret permissibilization as practical permissibilization or as permissibilization of the heart. Rather, that depends on the case; some may do it this way and some may do it that way. Well, some make it lawful in both action and heart, and some make it lawful in the heart but not in action, and some, as we said, in both heart and action, meaning…
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.